Fractal Softworks Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Starsector 0.9.1a is out! (05/10/19); Blog post: Raiding for Fun and Profit (11/27/19)

Pages: 1 ... 46 47 [48] 49 50 ... 281

Author Topic: Project Ironclads TC (28 of April, 2017) Source files for the mod  (Read 1357533 times)

hydremajor

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 161
    • View Profile
Re: Project Ironclads, version 3.0 (0.53.1a with campaign)
« Reply #705 on: September 06, 2012, 10:22:32 PM »

How about a wing commander mod addition ?

Them fighters look sweet....
Logged

Okim

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2146
    • View Profile
    • Okim`s Modelling stuff
Re: Project Ironclads, version 3.0 (0.53.1a with campaign)
« Reply #706 on: September 06, 2012, 11:05:36 PM »

No, definitely not going to put in controllable fighters. That`s a bit too much.

Okim

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2146
    • View Profile
    • Okim`s Modelling stuff
Re: Project Ironclads, version 3.0 (0.53.1a with campaign)
« Reply #707 on: September 07, 2012, 03:06:58 AM »

Finally got my first CR in campaign (yeah, i play my mod THAT often).

Here is its pic:


It has 2 shotgun drivers, 1 terminator autocannon, medium driver and some 125/50mm cannons for support in case of main weaponry failure or running out of ammo. Pd consists of 2 42mm flaks and 14mm defence/dual guns.

TaLaR

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1991
    • View Profile
Re: Project Ironclads, version 3.0 (0.53.1a with campaign)
« Reply #708 on: September 07, 2012, 05:13:36 AM »

More on balance:

1)Shotgun Driver - isn't it too good? 6x flux efficiency, good range, and minor spread only improves it's ability to hit small targets. It doesn't have any serious drawbacks compared to alternatives. Considering how flux-starved all RSF ships are, this weapon becomes the only logical choice for large slot kinetics.

2)Terminator AC - unmatched efficiency *and* dps amongst HE guns. Another large HE weapon - Heavy Rotary Assault Gun is inferior to it in every single stat, and has additional fire-up delay to make it even more of a joke...

3)ISA energy weapons have 2x flux efficiency vs RSF's 1x. Of course RSF ones are generally easier to hit with and often have better dps, but that's nowhere near enough to compensate such huge efficiency gap.

4)Also on ship systems - considering how powerful correctly used Fortress Shield is, it seems a bit too common. Accelerated ammo feeders as system for top RSF ships on the other hand seems a bit too weak, *especially* against aforementioned fortress shields...

5)Turbo-Laser Cannon vs Gatling Laser Cannon => improvements in all stats and no charge-up period at cost of only single OP. Of considering its 1x efficiency even Turbo is of dubious usefulness for most builds, but using Gauss is simply out of question.
« Last Edit: September 07, 2012, 05:28:00 AM by TaLaR »
Logged

Okim

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2146
    • View Profile
    • Okim`s Modelling stuff
Re: Project Ironclads, version 3.0 (0.53.1a with campaign)
« Reply #709 on: September 07, 2012, 06:46:24 AM »

Drivers have a very long charge-up. That forces you to calculate your aim with greater precision. Against civs, pirates and ISA this driver is a neat weapon. Against RSF its useless most of the time. Its kinetic and it costs you 26 OPs (408mm siege with slightly less range costs 20 OP for comparison).

Terminator is alright. There is a problem with heavy rotary cannon. I misplaced its cooldown and burst fire rate. Should be 0.2 for cooldown and 0.05 for burst rate. I`ve noticed it while playing and already fixed it.

Energy weapons are more advanced for ISA and more accurate for RSF. Plasma and blasters i`ve adjusted while playing to 1:1 in damage/flux while lasers are 1:1.5 damage/flux.

Look at ISA ships. They have almost no armor and can`t actually sustain shields for long enough when under heavy fire. Fortress shields are their saviours. Its not that difficult to defeat ISA Kansas cruiser and Michigan BB. Its might be a problem in 1 on 1 skirmishes, but with a wing or two of bombers or assault crafts and proper tactics its an easy task. For example - order your strikers to gather on the opposite side of the BB and then launch a simultaneous attack. It wont be able to cover two opposite sides even with its fortress shield.

About gatling vs turbo lasers. Its up to you what to pick. They are designed for different roles. Gatling is better used against shields as its a rapid fire weapon and generates hard flux very fast. Turbo is great when enemy shields are down or when their flux is high enough and enemy AI chooses to take a hit and overload rather then take a direct hit to its armour.
« Last Edit: September 07, 2012, 07:09:45 AM by Okim »
Logged

Okim

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2146
    • View Profile
    • Okim`s Modelling stuff
Re: Project Ironclads, version 3.0 (0.53.1a with campaign)
« Reply #710 on: September 07, 2012, 07:17:50 AM »

One more thing about lasers vs plasma that i forgot to mention.

Autolaser and laser beam are pd weapons. They are efficient against torpedoes and fighters.

IIE16 Yoshi

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 558
    • View Profile
Re: Project Ironclads, version 3.0 (0.53.1a with campaign)
« Reply #711 on: September 07, 2012, 07:48:49 AM »

The 3-shot laser, I believe it's just called the Laser Cannon, that is good at PD, but if it's not already aiming at a missile, it seems to have real difficulty in tracking a missile. It's wonderful for most missiles, but for things like the Eel, which (jerkily) swerves around to hit you in the ass, it will almost never take them out. Alien weapons are wonderfully OP. A Michigan, with the basic alien laser in all small mounts, the alien laserbeam in the mids, and russian turbolasers in the 4 larges makes for a exceptionally dangerous ship. Bigger, slower ships have to withstand the onslaught of the turbolasers, the alien laserbeams can shutdown a ship that's caught off guard with it's shields down, and the small alien lasers rip apart missiles, and if there's no missiles, they rip apart ships equally well. That said, the ship is awfully flux-heavy, with something in the region of 4-5000 flux/s.
Logged

TaLaR

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1991
    • View Profile
Re: Project Ironclads, version 3.0 (0.53.1a with campaign)
« Reply #712 on: September 07, 2012, 08:08:53 AM »

Drivers have a very long charge-up. That forces you to calculate your aim with greater precision. Against civs, pirates and ISA this driver is a neat weapon. Against RSF its useless most of the time. Its kinetic and it costs you 26 OPs (408mm siege with slightly less range costs 20 OP for comparison).

Ships in this mod are larger, slower and have much less acceleration than in vanilla. So even destroyers usually fail to dodge Shotgun driver. +Actual projectile speed is very fast, and it's not that much harder to use then slow projectile plasma cannons. I'd say it's quite useful against RSF as well - their shields might be bad, but still present. Combination of HE + Kinetics works better then pure HE, either it forces enemy to drop shields prematurely and eat HE or drains their flux reserves...

Terminator is alright. There is a problem with heavy rotary cannon. I misplaced its cooldown and burst fire rate. Should be 0.2 for cooldown and 0.05 for burst rate. I`ve noticed it while playing and already fixed it.

Well, yes Terminator lacks in total firing time and summary damage output. Still, using it only after you are mostly done with shields (via shotgun driver) can mostly compensate that problem. Though i guess if other HE weapons are getting an upgrade it might really be ok.

Energy weapons are more advanced for ISA and more accurate for RSF. Plasma and blasters i`ve adjusted while playing to 1:1 in damage/flux while lasers are 1:1.5 damage/flux.

Plasma weapons are usually harder to hit with and have lower dps than lasers so this might work. Need to playtest before i can comment further.

Look at ISA ships. They have almost no armor and can`t actually sustain shields for long enough when under heavy fire. Fortress shields are their saviours. Its not that difficult to defeat ISA Kansas cruiser and Michigan BB. Its might be a problem in 1 on 1 skirmishes, but with a wing or two of bombers or assault crafts and proper tactics its an easy task. For example - order your strikers to gather on the opposite side of the BB and then launch a simultaneous attack. It wont be able to cover two opposite sides even with its fortress shield.

Ok, i might be somewhat biased here - i strongly prefer sustainable builds. So speed + flux >> armor for me. +AI isn't actually good at pressing attack while at high flux (despite having enough armor to make it affordable), so RSF ships often give ISA easy opportunities to vent.

About gatling vs turbo lasers. Its up to you what to pick. They are designed for different roles. Gatling is better used against shields as its a rapid fire weapon and generates hard flux very fast. Turbo is great when enemy shields are down or when their flux is high enough and enemy AI chooses to take a hit and overload rather then take a direct hit to its armour.

You seem to imply that Gatling has better dps... Unless their stats have been already modified after 3.0 Turbo has better dps (625 vs 500), range (850 vs 750), turn rate (Slow vs Very Slow), per shot damage(750 vs 100, useful against armor damage reduction) and doesn't have charge-up, costing 25 OP vs 24 OP for Gatling => it's clear win no matter how you look at it.
Logged

pipikins

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 9
    • View Profile
Re: Project Ironclads, version 3.0 (0.53.1a with campaign)
« Reply #713 on: September 07, 2012, 09:06:44 AM »

Redownload the archive. I have no other idea why that could happen.


not working :( this mods looks epic anyway :P thanks
Logged

SteelRonin

  • Lieutenant
  • **
  • Posts: 51
    • View Profile
Re: Project Ironclads, version 3.0 (0.53.1a with campaign)
« Reply #714 on: September 07, 2012, 10:43:03 AM »

I feel stupid

very.... very... stupid..

did not have 53.1 xD
Logged

Okim

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2146
    • View Profile
    • Okim`s Modelling stuff
Re: Project Ironclads, version 3.0 (0.53.1a with campaign)
« Reply #715 on: September 07, 2012, 11:00:46 AM »

LOL at not having 0.53 :) Sorry.

Shotgun driver is planned to hit more often than its heavy brother with at least 1 projectile. Try firing at pirate Raider/ISA Arcansas with a basic or heavy driver and then with a sg driver. You`ll see the difference - sg will be more effective here. Then try firing sg shot at aproaching RSF destroyer with shields down. Shotgun will miss with 3-4 projectiles due to the low profile of DE where heavy or basic driver will hit directly where you pointed thus being more effective.

Gatling is firing in a constant burst while turbolaser fires 1 shot per 1.2 seconds. Where GL throws 4 shots and forces enemy to keep the shield up - TL fires 1 shot and provides a 1.2 seconds apportunity for the target to drop their shields and get rid of hard flux.

Okim

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2146
    • View Profile
    • Okim`s Modelling stuff
Re: Project Ironclads, version 3.0 (0.53.1a with campaign)
« Reply #716 on: September 08, 2012, 11:44:14 AM »

Found a problem with gatling laser. There were two entries and the latest GL was not updated. Fixed it and removed charge-up for it (mainly because of the confusing 100x9999 damage/shots - seems incompatible with energy weapon type).

Added XLE linked beamer, charged boltgun, set of kinetic rockets (small, med, large launchers), set of smart rockets (sm/med/lrg, 'Smart' means that they adjust their heading when launched). Added UIN emp gun - a small weapon with almost no damage, but good range, lots of EMP and PD/ANTI_FIGHTER flags. Its nice to see large missiles loosing their drives and bobmers smashing into your hull :)

Edited all the variants. This was required after some balancing changes. All pirate ships now use at least one weapons from each faction.
« Last Edit: September 08, 2012, 11:47:10 AM by Okim »
Logged

Okim

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2146
    • View Profile
    • Okim`s Modelling stuff
Re: Project Ironclads, version 3.0 (0.53.1a with campaign)
« Reply #717 on: September 10, 2012, 01:59:58 AM »

Saw this thread about favourites per ship class http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=4296.0. It made me wonder what are your favourites in Ironclads?

Mine for instance are:

Fighter: Su57. It has a new striking look and its manoeuvring jets make it a hard to hit fighter. Multiroleness makes it an interesting fighter (in current dev version SU-57 has undergone some changes that moved it from strike fighter type to multirole).

Frigate: Colorado for its large energy mount. Especially when its equipped with a gatling laser.

Destroyer: Mauler for its scrappy looks and lots of mounts. Usually put a frontal shield on it an arm it with a heavy rotary autocannon + some ion cannons. MJs makes getting into the range of the guns much easier.

Cruiser: Kentucky with loads of torpedoes. Can blow battleships with ease if kept safe from their guns. Plasma torps + Hellfire torps make wonders.

Battleship: Moscow. Mainly because it is a proper BB with built_in weapons and loads of firepower.

strych90

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 3
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Project Ironclads, version 3.0 (0.53.1a with campaign)
« Reply #718 on: September 10, 2012, 05:02:03 AM »

Hey, don't know if someones already pointed this out, but the tornado interceptors have 1950 combat speed
Logged

Okim

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2146
    • View Profile
    • Okim`s Modelling stuff
Re: Project Ironclads, version 3.0 (0.53.1a with campaign)
« Reply #719 on: September 10, 2012, 05:07:14 AM »

Yeah, and a burn drive in addition :)

Fixed that.
Pages: 1 ... 46 47 [48] 49 50 ... 281